Sniffer Dogs Led Astray By Their Handlers

It's a familiar site at any international Airport. Working dogs and their handlers busy about the place sniffing this and that in a constant search for prohibited substances. But a new study by researches at the University of California at Davis has found evidence that these dogs may be influenced by their handlers. When it comes to sniffing out the goods. The behavior of the handler, conscious or otherwise, may be having an effect on the dogs detection rates.

In this study. 18 dog/handler teams were studied under test conditions. Decoy scents were planted to test the influence of these distractions on the dogs. And the handlers were told that a paper marker would show the location of a target scent. There was no target scent present in the testing. So any alert on the part of the dog/handler team was a false positive.

What they found was that there were more alerts in the test scenarios where the handler was told of the location of a target scent. And that in fact the handler reported more alerts around the location indicated by the marker. So it was clear that the handlers expectation that a scent was present had an influence on the dog.

What I find interesting is the number of alerts in total. 225. This seems like an awful lot of false positives.
Also the tests were not recorded on video. So the effect of the handlers bias, leading them to incorrectly interpret the dogs actions as an alert, cannot be fully ruled out.

I would really like to see this experiment repeated with a larger sample size, closer scrutiny of the participants and the introduction of actual target scents. It would then be interesting to see if the handlers, or dogs, could be fooled into missing the target scents and giving a false alert. For example the handler may be told of the false location of the target scent and see if the dog can identify the correct location.

Though maybe that would be a bit hard on the poor subject team. Interesting tho.

Maori Elder "Sees" the Destruction of Wellington

Maori Elder, Keri Tia Toa, has used a speech this morning at the Waitangi treaty grounds to share his vision of the destruction of Wellington by devastating earthquake.

You can listen to his tale here. 

This is bizarre to say the least. I mean consider the context. A morning prayer session during what is a reflection on the singing of New Zealand's founding document. It's a time when we as kiwis are to remember how or nation came about.

And then we have an old crank stand up and declare that our capital will be destroyed. That our seat of government will be thrown down and that there will be soldiers and bodies in the streets. 

Amazing. 

Here are the possibilities as I see them: 

1) Keri Tia Toa is just a whack job. I mean it's entirely possible that he is simply loosing his marbles and decided to tell a fantastical story for what ever end he had in mind. 

2) He had a weird experience some time ago. A bad dream or something. And his obsessing over it combined with what ever influence his particular spirituality or belief system has had. Has twisted his memory of this experience into the strange "vision" that he now reports.  

3) He is just plain making shit up. This seems the most unlikely to my mind. Tho people have been known to do stranger things. 

As predictions go this is a rather lame one. I mean yes it is spectacular and would have enormous consequences for Wellington and the country as a whole. But it's so vague and rather a given.

This is what we skeptics refer to as the low hanging fruit. It's a prediction that is very likely to come true. There will be a large earthquake in Wellington some time in the future. That is a certainty. By not giving a specific date he leaves the possibility open that no matter when it happens it can still count as a successful prediction. Keri Tia Toa does say that it will be in the month of June. This is surprising because it cuts down his chances of being right to 1 in 12. Although if it's close to June or even in the middle of the year some time it will probably be considered a hit by some.     

I don't think I'll even bother why the idea of predicting the future is complete and total rubbish. suffice to say that in the entire history of our species there has never been any convincing evidence that humans are able to predict future events without using some form of inductive reasoning or theoretical  structure. No person has ever demonstrated the ability to have an accurate "vision" of events to come.   

I find this whole thing rather embarrassing really. A supposedly respected individual given a forum of national importance and he uses it to put forward an absurd vision of death and destruction. I mean come on. 

What do you think?        

Is This Brain Washing?

Here is "note able" creationist and general all around jackass Ken Ham indoctrinating a room full of kids.

  

This has a very cult like feel to it don't you think. The brain washing of young children in this way I find absolutely appalling and abhorrent. Filling their young minds with nonsense and denying them the chance to discover the truth is a form of abuse. 

I have real issue with the indoctrination of the young by religions of all stripes. But it seems all the more repugnant when it takes the form of anti-science, anti-reason, nonsense. These children will grow up and enter society with a warped and inaccurate knowledge of how the world works. This will surely hurt their prospects for higher learning and hold back their understanding of just how truly amazing things really are. 

Note to Mr Ham: I notice you're using a microphone. And a Projector. And you're in a Building. Probably in a modern city. No doubt you're wearing manufactured clothing. And you probably arrived at your brainwashing event in a car, train or bus. 

All of these things would not be possible without the science that you are so eager to deny (Science in general, not specifically evolution of course). Science works! The evidence is all around us in our lives. Evolution is a fact. The earth is older then 6000 years. Much Much older! Your holy book is an interesting piece of historical literature. It is not literal truth. 

O and also. 

You suck.

The above is not an argument in favor of my position. Merely something I felt like saying. Full and complete demolitions of the ridiculous Creationist/Intelligent Design ideas have been done to death by many, many people much smarter and more well informed than I. They can be found all over the interweb.

I really, really, really hate the indoctrination of the young and impressionable by the idiotic and the  foolish. Teach children to think critically and to reason for themselves. Then let them loose with the evidence and see what conclusions they reach. 

I suspect that if this were done right. Many more people in our society would have a more accurate and informed view of the world.    

      

Andrew Wakefield, Shill, Fraud and Just Plain Wrong

So that which we have known or suspected for a while now has finally been laid out in exquisite and mind blowing detail with 3 articles in the British Medical Journal. The articles by Brian deer completely expose Wakefield as a ruthless conman that perpetrated a conscious, and incredibly harmful, fraud on the world in order to enrich himself. 

Article one tells the story of Wakefield's study. Not only was this study woefully undersized for it's purpose. Containing just 12 subjects. Not only was it a breach of the ethical and legal responsibilities one has when conducting such research. As it now turns out it was also complete and utter bullshit. Crap. Worthless. Wakefield falsified the data and just plain lied in order to get the result he wanted. But why?

Money! Article two tells about how Wakefield planned to make tens of millions of dollars from the ideas supported in his fraudulent study. 

Money making scheme number one. Wakefield was paid a substantial amount of money (more than 435,000 pounds in fact) from lawyers representing some anti vaccine groups. These were trying to sue vaccine manufactures for allegedly giving their children Autism. 

Money making scheme number two. Wakefield had a patent pending on a single dose measles vaccine. Since his study alleged that it was the triple dose Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine that was the cause of the problems. He stood to make millions from the licencing and use of his single dose vaccine. 

Money making scheme number three. Wakefield created a kit that was designed to detect the symptoms of the new syndrome he had invented. Sales of this product were expected to net Wakefield another few tens of millions. 

Article three is the final installment and tells of the fallout from all these revelations coming to light. The accusations. The denials. And the complete down fall of Wakefield in respected medical circles.  

There should be no doubt. This man shares a great amount of responsibility for the creation of the modern anti-vaccination movement. There is real blood on his hands. Children have suffered and died because of his selfish fraud.

The terrible (or delicious) irony in all this is that Dr Andrew Wakefield, the trumpeted hero and darling of the anti-vaccination movement, is the very thing they purport to despise. Whenever a Doctor, scientist or skeptic speaks out in defense of vaccines. The anti-vaxers accuse them of being on the pay roll of "big pharma". They accuse us of profiteering. Of defending the status quo because it is making us all rich. While the reality is that we are just following the science and trying to improve the health of children and the community. Wakefield was doing exactly what they accuse us of! He took money to falsify the science in order to make himself rich. He put the lives of children at risk for his own benefit. He accepted money in the form of travel, accommodation and speakers fees form pharmaceutical companies. Wakefield was a lying, cheating big pharma shill! Amazing.

The response from the anti-vax community has been typical rationalizing and conspiracy mongering. They allege that Brian Deer is a "big pharma" assassin. Brought in to discredit Wakefield and the science behind the vaccine autism link. Brian Deer is an award winning investigative journalist that, among other things, was  heavily involved in exposing the vioxx scandal. In the pocket of "big pharma"? Please. Try something else for a change a. As for the science behind the vaccine Autism link. There isn't any. None at all. All the science we have says there is no link between vaccination and autism. A great summary of the evidence can be found on Science Based Medicine here.       

Wakefield still stands by his study and the findings. I think he does so now because his mind has become so distorted over time that he could never bring himself to accept and admit the truth. Perhaps he has even managed to convince himself that his fraud is true. We know that he knew of his fraud at the time because he was offered the chance to repeat his study in a controlled and sanctioned environment with 150 children. He did not take this offer up because he knew that he would not be able to falsify such a large and heavily scrutinized study. As it would surely have been. And that such a study would indeed prove all his ideas and earlier findings to be wrong.

We must always be on the lookout for more Wakefields. The good thing about science is that it is self correcting. Bad science and fraud are always weeded out in the fullness of time. The bad news is that the effects of these things can linger on long after the science has thrown them out. And people can be, and are, adversely affected. In the worst cases, such as this one, children can die.  

  

Does not follow Rodger

One of the mindless foot soldiers of CAM has put forward another attempt to justify his dangerous quackery by attacking "BIG PHARMA" (oooooooo). I'm talking about the Rodger. The jackass who promotes MMS in NZ. We remember MMS right. From here and here.

Well I got an email (I'm on his mailing list, Yay!) from Rodger attacking "big pharma" for apparently suppressing the miraculous benefits of vitamin C mega dosing. It's a short email. So here it is.    

Dear MMS customers,

The lengths that Big Pharma will go to:

Remember the recent stir caused when intravenous vitamin C cured a man from the King Country here in NZ.

Such cures (by an unpatientable natural product), are not good for Big Pharma business. Best that Big Pharma pull a     few strings and just have intravenous vitamin C outlawed....

http://www.naturalnews.com/030936_vitamin_C_FDA.html

Kind regards,

Roger

I'm not going to go to lengths explaining why this is stupid. Or expand on why natural news is possibly the single biggest repository of crap on the whole of the interweb. Though do check it out if you like. It's funny stuff. 

I'm just going to talk about why the "Big Phrama" bad so buy Rodger's stuff, argument is moronic.


This one is a favorite of the CAM crowd. They point to the Pharmaceutical industry and say look at how much money they are making. They must be evil and all their products must be equally evil. But our products and methods aren't making us rich. Therefore our stuff must work.


The problem with this line of reasoning is that it says absolutely nothing about the products and methods the CAM practitioners and promoters are pushing. An equivalent argument could go like this. 


Look at all those big breakfast cereal companies making lots of money from selling their cereal. The cereal must be bad for you. What about this mold I found under the floor. It's all natural, unprocessed and I paid nothing for it. It must be way better for us than the commercial cereals. 


A bit of an over exaggeration perhaps, but not by much. This is an argument style where you attempt to make your own side stronger by promoting a negative attribute of the other side. It says nothing about the actual strength of your position and does not address any of the actual issues that may be under debate.


Roger claims that "Big Pharma" is ruthlessly suppressing anything that they are unable to profit from. Even when it is a proven cure for a known ailment. Therefore, the unstated premise, you should consume the bleach he is selling. 


Sorry. But I din't buy it.                 

1st of 2011

For my first entry of 2011 I'm gonna do something a little different. Here are some awesome pictures I took while flying in the Tararua Ranges yesterday morning.

Sweet yeah?

So what's going on here?
Well the tops of the clouds you can see on the other side of the ridge are at about 4,000 feet. The clouded in side is to the east and the clear side is west. Whats happening is the moist air forming the clouds is blowing ever so slowly over the ridges and falling down the sides. Once that happens it disappears. Why?
Well it all has to do with cloud formation. Very briefly. Clouds are formed when the air becomes saturated with water vapor. This means that the air cannot hold any more water in it than it has already. The level at which the air saturates is dependent on the moisture content and is given as a temperature. This saturation temperature is known as the dew point. The warmer the air the more water it can hold. So if air is at the same temperature as it's dew point cools down, it will no longer be able to hold the water vapor it contains.
And thats when clouds form.    

So back to the question. Why do the clouds disappear when they flow over the ridge? The reason is two fold. 1st) the air containing the clouds is colder than the surrounding air. It's colder because the clouds reflect the suns energy and also because saturated air has a higher specific heat capacity than dry air (This means that it takes more energy to heat it up by the same amount). Because the clouds are colder they are more dense than the surrounding air and so they sink.
2nd) As they sink they warm up. This happens because the sinking air increases in pressure and when the pressure of a gas increases, it's temperature also increases. As they warm up, the temperature of the air pases it's due point and the clouds evaporate.

Neat yes?

Climate Change and ID

What do climate change denial and Intelligent Design have in common? I mean other then the obvious. They are both supported by groups that have an idealogical agenda. Both groups refuse to, or are incapable of, acknowledging the evidence. Both groups have well resourced and politically connected lobbys.

Well those are all true. I'm talking about recent moves in the US by the climate change deniers to adopt a "teach the controversy" policy towards climate change.  They want to give equal time and attention to those who believe that it's all a hoax or a misunderstanding or a conspiracy.

This was exactly the tactic adopted by the Creationists after they failed to get creationism into public schools in the US. They engaged a professional marketing firm. Then they changed their name from Creationism to Intelligent Design and adopted the line "teach the controversy".  

Lets get this straight. There is no controversy over climate change. It is happening. All the evidence says that is it and it is the overwhelming consensus of the global climate science community. There is no more a controversy over this than there is that evolution happened. It did. Or that the earth is an oblate spheroid. It is. Or that the sun is powered by nuclear fusion. It is. Or... Well you get the point. This is a case of deliberate amd manufactured false balance in the media that I have previously written about.

The only controversy over climate change is the false idea that there is a controversy. It's a false problem created by wealthy backers with an ideological block that doesn't allow them to acknowledge the evidence and come to a conclusion about reality.